I like Lou but let's not forget that he also managed one of the biggest busts in Mariner history - 1998. We may never see a team with that much front line talent again. Four bona fide HOF players (Griffey, Johnson, ARod, Edgar), complimented by a group of good players that had good years (Moyer, Fassero, Buhner, Segui), another wave of decent players in key positions (Wilson, Cora, Hill/Amaral, Davis, Timlin).
I like Lou but he was handed wave after wave of talent, year after year. Sometimes he won with it, sometimes he didn't. Sometimes he could get a team to buy in, sometimes he couldn't. Some years (thank you Brian Price!) he could manage his pitchers, some years he couldn't.
5. Lou presided over the end of 20+ years' worth of expect-to-lose baseball in Seattle. Without any question, he taught the Mariner franchise how to challenge opponents and how to win. I was there. For the expect-to-lose era.
.......
6. That could easily be the exact issue the Mariners are dealing with in 2010-11 -- a roster with a decent amount of talent, on which the will to win has collapsed.
........
7. The shelf life for managers expires at age 55-57, like with Hargrove and 100 other guys, and Lou is I don't even know, what, 10 years past that?
Especially considering the media views him as a fat slob who doesn't know baseball as well as they do. Baseball execs want him around despite the PR eyesore.
.........
8. But Lou has been able to carry his passion for the game into his Denny's Discount days.
........
9. Lou isn't particularly a "fiery manager" in the mold of the Billy Martin types who come in, get all over guys, get them winning ... but who then have to change teams every 2-3 years because people can't stand them any longer. Lou was in Seattle a long time, and it wasn't the players who wanted him to leave.
Lou is passionate, but he doesn't have a short shelf life with individual teams that have talent. He's just a good manager, a rare one who can bring intensity and yet work with one clubhouse a long time.
He'd have been in Seattle 15-20 years except that he and Lincoln had a big conflict. That's not a "fiery manager" just like Earl Weaver wasn't a "fiery manager." They were intense managers.
I dunno, at least Lou wasn't a short-shelf guy in Cincinnati and Seattle. Maybe in his old age he's getting crankier and moving closer to a Billy type. I doubt it, but it could be. If that were the case it wouldn't matter in Seattle, because he'd be like 70 at the end of his 3-4 years anyway. :- )
........
10. Lou has always been wonderful in picking which young players can play, and which can't.
It isn't sentiment that is the reason Lou always has a job on his own terms. He's a fine judge of talent, a remarkable advance scout, a guy who relates to modern players and a guy who is usually a step ahead of the other manager on bullpen / batter switches.
........
11. I strongly suspect that if you intersected Lou Piniella with this team, he'd teach them how to "go to war" just like he did the Mariners the last time around.
.......
12. I strongly suspect that Howard Lincoln can't stand to be in the same room with Lou, so IMHO the point is 100.00% moot, while Lincoln's here.
........
13. After Lou's low-dignity media sessions over his 7 (?) years here, Mike Hargrove was selected in part because he brought such dignity and credibility to the job. The same was true of Melvin and, now, of Wakamatsu.
Personality conflicts aside, I'm guessing the entire ownership group manifests a general distaste for Lou's act ....
.........
14. Although the Mariners have always had a great bias toward hometown heroes and the tickets-sold that come with them. They might just be swayed by such a factor in Lou's case - who knows.
...........
15. See #2.
.
Cheers,
Dr D
Comments
I'd say 1998 is a huge black mark. Good point.
.............
Similarly, as respects surprise finishes, IIRC the 2001 team was picked to play .500 ball and finish about third in the division... '90 Reds IIRC were a similar out-of-nowhere team... Lou's first two Cubs teams while we're at it...
There was a study done a few years ago that showed Lou would consistently get more out of his hitters than other managers. Statistically he was the best at this in the game.
Granted, I don't know who keeps track of this anymore and Piniella may have fallen off with age.
Get him a pitching coach he respects and I'd explore the possibility of taking him back (or someone else). I'm not exactly sure what Wak is good at anymore if he wasn't responsible for the '09s chemistry.
The methodology would be interesting, too.